From a landmark
silent movie … to becoming one of Universals original faces of horror … to a
famous Broadway musical … “The Phantom of the Opera” has had quite a
history. Living up to his name, this is a character that never truly dies, and
always finds new life in the media for every new generation.
Before I get into
all of that, I should start by giving the character some context. It all began
with a French novel published in 1910, and authored by one Gaston Leroux. “The
Phantom of the Opera” tells the tale of a physically-deformed, and
mentally-disturbed genius, who was one of the architects that took part in the
construction of an opera house, and secretly built a home for himself in the Opera’s
cellars. While in the shadows, he secretly teaches a young talent named
Christine Daaé to be an Opera singing sensation. Over time, he gradually falls
in love with his student, and dose all in his power to make sure she stays in
the spot light … even if that means disposing of a competitive singer or two. Things take a dark turn when Christine’s boyfriend Raoul enters the picture,
and it drives the Phantom to be all the more possessive of his prized pupal.
In
the vain of “The Hunchback of Notre Dame”, the Phantom is a tale of
identifying both the beauty and ugly that lies within a man who resembles a
monster. There have been at least a dozen different screen versions of the
character, so … for a special October treat … let’s take a look at the ever-growing
legacy of one of Hollywood’s and Broadways most famous monsters. I’m mostly
going to highlight the ones that are relevant to his legacy, or ones that I’ve
personally seen, and developed opinions on. On that note, while I highlight
these different adaptions, I'll also be giving my own personal opinion on how
they’ve connected with me as a long-time fan of this character.
“The
Phantom of the Opera” (1925) (Silent Movie)
At the dawn of motion picture
cinema … at the height of the silent-film area … “The Phantom of the Opera”
marked one of America’s first land mark horror movies. After all these years,
this film is almost universally regarded as the absolute greatest and most
influential film version of "The Phantom of the Opera". It contained a highly influential color sequence, which showed-off the
films stunning set designs, colorful costumes, and was all-around a technical
marvel for its time. Beyond that, the big attraction of this film is Lon Chaney
in the role of The Phantom, who conveys a great deal of passion and emotion
into this performance without speaking a single line of dialogue. It’s a great
example of a “visual performance”, and he’s honestly quiet captivating in the
role all these years later.
I first saw this movie way back when I was just a
High-School student studying in Drama class, and I remember Lon Chaney’s performance impacting me
through his use of body movements and postures. Equally credible was Chaney’s
contribution to the look and design of the Phantom. Most other films have the
same looking Phantom with a stage mask and black suit, but this films depiction
of the Phantom is completely unique, and has never been replicated. Even if
you’ve never seen this movie, you may still be aware of the footage of Chaney’s
famous unmasking scene, which is often cited as one of the most startling
moments from the age of silent motion picture cinema. Chaney was also his own
make-up man, and his grotesque face is still one of the most iconic of the
whole horror genera. While I can’t say this film really thrilled me, it did
still hold my attention more than I expected, and I absolutely respect its
status as a film classic. I wouldn’t personally call this a favorite that I
re-watch often, but it’s certainly worth viewing. Even if you’re not a fan of
old silent films, you might still be impressed by this movie … just as long as
you view it as an accomplishment for its time.
"The Phantom of the Opera" (1943) (Universal Classic)
After
the silent movies of the 1920’s, Universal pioneered the earliest sound horror
films with iconic movie monsters including “Dracula”, “Frankenstein”
and “The Wolf Man”. It was in 1943 that Universal released the first
sound version of “The Phantom of the Opera”, which was also a rare color
horror movie for its time, as all the other classic monsters were only
presented in Black and White. While this film lives in the shadow of its 1925
predecessor, this version is still regarded as a landmark in its own right.
It’s when The Phantom of the Opera became one with Universals eight classic
horror icons, and it’s the film that introduced his modern look … with the
stage mask covering his face, the big hat, and all black theatrical attire.
Following after his success as “The Invisible Man”, Claude Rains once again shined as “The
Phantom of the Opera” in this version. In many respects, he’s the second-best
actor to make an icon out of the tragic villain. Susanna Foster also shines as
the Phantoms forbidden love Christine, and personally, this is my favorite
portrayal of the character from any version. This also remains one of the
absolute best-looking Phantom movies, with stunning set designs, and bright
colors everywhere you look. Unfortunately, this film has some narrative
problems and oddly placed comedy that keeps it from achieving greatness.
Instead of one boyfriend coming between Christine and the Phantom … this movie
has two … which is too much. Half the time, the antics between the two
boy-friends hijack the movie from our two principle characters, and it gets old
fast. While the film has its faults, it’s also got the spectacle, and two
solid leading performances, which is enough to rank this among the better film
versions.
“The
Phantom of the Opera” (1962) (Hammer Studio’s Remake)
Throughout the
1950’s and 60’s, a British studio called Hammer film productions remade all of
Universals classic monster movies in the vain of “Dracula”, “The
Mummy”, “Frankenstein”, and so forth. So naturally, in 1962, Hammer
released their own version of “The Phantom of the Opera”. This was
actually the first non-musical film version of the Phantom I ever saw in my
life time, and I personally like it more than the previous two classics.
This
film makes the Phantom far more sympathetic then most other versions, while
still keeping him a mysterious and imposing figure. It also features my
absolute favorite sequence of the falling chandelier. Most other versions
feature the Phantom actively sabotaging the chandelier to fall on stage, but in
this version its a sudden accident. This leads into a harrowing, yet tragic climax,
in which the Phantom leaps to the girl’s rescue, sacrificing his life to save
hers. This film also gives the Phantom a hunchbacked side-kick, which is
different, but a welcome addition. Herbert Lom of “Pink Panther” fame,
adorns the role of the Phantom, and dose a respectable job. The supporting
characters are good, including a stand-out supporting role from Michael Gough
(Batman’s Alfred), as a corporate villain running the theater. While this film
version has never impacted the legacy of the character, and is often glanced
over … it still remains my personal favorite movie version of “The Phantom of
the Opera”.
"The Phantom of the Opera" (1986) (Broadway musical)
After several
years of being a horror movie icon, The Phantom of the Opera would make a game
changing transition into musical theater in 1986. It was Andrew Lloyd Webber who
took the bare ingredients of this character, and turned it into a completely
original, musical phenomenon.
The Broadway musical adaptation of “The
Phantom of the Opera” was a huge success, and has gone on to become a
classic in its own right. In fact, it changed the way people viewed the
character, as he was now a stage icon as opposed to a Horror mascot, and it’s
remained his most popular image in the public eye. Some audiences even credit
Andrew Lloyd Webber for creating the character, even though Gaston Leroux was the
original architect behind the Phantom. Heck, even Michael Crawford has joined
the ranks of Lon Chaney and Claude Rains as an immortal portrayal of the iconic
character. Still to this day, “The Phantom of the Opera” remains one of
my favorite musicals from the 80’s golden age of Broadway hits. The songs are
all memorable, the atmosphere is rich, the set design was a marvel to behold on
stage, and it remains the landmark event in the Phantoms legacy that has yet to
be topped.
“The
Phantom of the Opera” (1989) (Horror Reboot)
Shortly after the huge
success of the musical, there was another theatrical presentation of “Phantom
of the Opera” in 1989, and this one aimed to bring the Phantom back to its horror
genera roots. However, by the Phantoms standards, this reboot was Horror on steroids, with lots of gore, a
disturbed tone, chilling atmosphere, creepy set designs, demonic elements, and even
Freddy Krueger himself Robert Englund took on the role of the Phantom.
I have
to say, this is one of my favorite performances of the Phantom, as Robert
Englund infuses the character with a lot of chilling menace, but he’s also very
poetic and intelligent, which makes the character all the more interesting to
watch. Jill Schoelen is also very likable as Christine Daaé in this version, and
looks great on screen. The remaining characters all do a good job holding their
own, the direction is unique, and the pacing is very good. It’s unfortunate though
that the story losses itself with one too many confusing plot points, including
time-travel, reincarnations, an appearance from the Devil, and other demonic
elements that have nothing to do with the source material. A part of me wants
to label this film as an underrated version of “The Phantom of the Opera”,
because it is engaging to watch, but regrettably, the stuff that doesn’t work
in this film ruin all the good that the movie has to offer.
“The
Phantom of the Opera” (1998) (Italian Reboot)
It was at the end of the
millennium that Gaston Leroux's Novel “Le Fantôme de l'Opéra” would be
adapted into an Italian Horror film, except this one didn’t get a theatrical
release, and was instead a direct to video production. With that said, the director of the movie, Dario Argento, is a known name in the horror genera, and has made some big ones, including "Suspiria", and "Inferno" ... but this was not one of his bright spots. While this version tried
to stick closer to the events of the book, it still made some huge changes …
for the worst.
The Phantom this time is not disfigured, and has a back-story
more fitting for a Batman villain. Just like how the Penguin from “Batman
Returns” was abandoned by his parents as a baby, and Raised by Penguins in
the sewer, the same thing happens to this Phantom ... except he’s raised by
creepy red-eyed rats instead of Penguins. So, how many remakes does it take
before a good story gets stupid and unwatchable? Well … jumping right to the
opinion, this is the worst version of “The Phantom of the Opera” I've ever seen, but even
that’s a gross understatement. This Phantom possess none of the class or
mystique that characterized all the previous versions, and instead we have this
creepy rat-person, who’s also a sexual predator. The only two things we’ll see
him do throughout the movie are sleep with rats and rape woman … it’s as far
removed from a quality film as you can possibly get. The movie also drags at a
dull pace, there are lots of stupid, random scenes that have nothing to do with
anything, and it all concludes with a terrible ending, one of the worst I've ever seen, … I think I’ll leave it at that. Skip this film entirely, and just stick
with any other version.
“The
Phantom of the Opera” (2004) (Musical Motion Picture)
After two failed
Horror reboots, director Joel Schumacher helmed a different project, a
theatrical musical rendition of “The Phantom of the Opera” adapted from
the hit Broadway play. The movie came out in 2004, and while it was a modest
success, it unfortunately got some really negative reviews from critics. Still,
the film has its fans, and being completely transparent for a moment …
this is the movie I have the most nostalgic fondness for.
For both me and my
sister, this was our introduction to the Phantom of the Opera, and what got the
ball rolling. While I didn’t care for this movie upon my first viewing, it’s
stuck with me over the years, and I find myself liking it more with each
viewing. It still has faults, with some boring sequences, an inconsistent color
scheme, and an autopilot direction from Schumacher. Still, there’s quality to be
found in the film’s sheer spectacle. The costumes are good, the cinematography
is great, the visuals are impressive, and the sets are amazing to look at. While
the cast doesn’t always stick a landing, I still remember everyone in their
respected roles … including a miscast Gerard Butler, who’s portrayal of the
Phantom has still stuck with me as a memorable one. This again applies to Emmy
Rossum as Christine, who isn’t the best performance, yet she’s always the face
that comes to mind first when I think of the character. I can’t make a
persuasive argument that it’s one of the millenniums best movie-musicals, but
it’s remained a small favorite of mine, and one that I think is a little better
than its reputation would suggest. If you’re a fan of the Broadway play, I say
checkout this version of “The Phantom of the Opera” for an unremarkable
… yet satisfying experience.
While there are still other film versions I haven't mentioned, and even a
sequel to the Broadway musical that came out years later, I’m at the point
where I think I can stop. In conclusion, you can view The Phantom of the Opera
as both a staple of Horror cinema and Broadway Musicals, and as such ... he’s
become one of my favorite monster-based characters. He’s had a rich legacy with
various films, stories, stage productions, and it’s made the Phantom all the
more fascinating to watch evolve over the years ... and beyond.
"IT'S OVER NOW, THE MUSIC ... OF ... THE ... NIGHT!"
No comments:
Post a Comment